On 19 Dec 2017, at 10:08, Martin Hoffmann wrote:
> Except that "child zone" should probably be "subordinate zones" or
> something similar to also include (great)*grandchildren.
If "ancestor" were acceptable, then the natural counterpart would be
"descendant".
0,02
Niall O'Reilly
signature.asc
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 03:56:22AM +0100,
> Martin Hoffmann wrote
> a message of 38 lines which said:
>
> > > The current definition is restrictive: it mentions only name
> > > servers.
> > >
> > > IMHO, "in-bailiwick" could be said for any domain name, even if
>
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 03:56:22AM +0100,
Martin Hoffmann wrote
a message of 38 lines which said:
> > The current definition is restrictive: it mentions only name servers.
> >
> > IMHO, "in-bailiwick" could be said for any domain name, even if it has
> > less practical consequences than for n
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 10:27:32AM -0800,
> Paul Hoffman wrote
> a message of 28 lines which said:
>
> > - In-bailiwick
> > - Out-of-bailiwick
>
> The current definition is restrictive: it mentions only name servers.
>
> IMHO, "in-bailiwick" could be said for a
Thanks for the input. This is now slated for the next version of the draft.
--Paul Hoffman
___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 11:30:00AM +0900,
fujiw...@jprs.co.jp wrote
a message of 74 lines which said:
> Adding examples as a table is good ? or too large ?
No, not too large. It is a very good idea and this table is useful.
___
DNSOP mailing list
D
On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 10:27:32AM -0800,
Paul Hoffman wrote
a message of 28 lines which said:
> - In-bailiwick
> - Out-of-bailiwick
The current definition is restrictive: it mentions only name servers.
IMHO, "in-bailiwick" could be said for any domain name, even if it has
less practical con
yes. this is good.
-G
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 12:30 PM, wrote:
> Thanks.
>
> Adding a example as a text is a little complicated.
>
> Adding examples as a table is good ? or too large ?
>
> Delegation | Parent | Name Server Name | Type
> | Zone ||
> -
Thanks.
Adding a example as a text is a little complicated.
Adding examples as a table is good ? or too large ?
Delegation | Parent | Name Server Name | Type
| Zone ||
+++--
com | .
feels like a concrete example in a.b.c.example.com terms would help
define both in-baliwick, and out-of-baliwick, for the cases.
On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 9:42 PM, wrote:
> Thanks.
>
> terminology-bis-08:
> | In-bailiwick: An adjective to describe a name server whose name is
> |either subordin
Thanks.
terminology-bis-08:
| In-bailiwick: An adjective to describe a name server whose name is
|either subordinate to or (rarely) the same as the zone origin.
Ok, In-bailwick in terminology-bis-08 may be restrictive because "the
zone origin" is unclear. I intended that "the zone origin" is
The text for "in-bailwick" is too restrictive, it doesn’t just cover NS records
or
glue records.
In-bailwick refers to records that in the normal course of DNS resolution
would have been requested of by the server the current response is from.
e.g. if you are querying a .com server then all recor
Greetings again.
Some of the new terms added to the terminology-bis draft
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis/)since
RFC 7719 can be a bit tricky. This week, we hope you will look at the
definitions in the draft for:
- In-bailiwick
- Out-of-bailiwick
- In-domain
13 matches
Mail list logo
